Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
National Postcodes to be introduced
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
They wouldn't have to be assigned randomly or aggregated into larger units. They could be assigned automatically in some way so that neighbouring areas have similar codes. So, if one area has the code D3, then the area to the West of it, would have D2, and the area to the East would have D4. The area to the South would have E3. Small areas aren't regular shapes obviously, but some algorithm could be devised to allocate them in that general kind of way.
Have you ever looked at a map of small areas? Here's one:
There is very little regularity to them, even in urban areas. I can't see a way of allocating codes to them that would be intuitive. The alternative is to aggregate them into larger areas, and then you're into snobbery territory.
The taxi map would be a useful example if this was 1973. Practically every taxi I see in Dublin has an in-car satnav or a driver using a phone with google maps.
I agree that small areas area great innovation for statistical analysis. They were never designed for ease of delivery in mind and this whole issue is a bit of a red herring.0 -
-
-
As far as I know, automated software was used to generate the small area map (perhaps with some manual oversight). What we're talking about here is an easier problem to solve than creating the areas in the first place. So, I don't think it's beyond the capabilities of mankind. Even if you did aggregate them as you're suggesting, there is still a hell of a lot of them (over 18,000). So, some kind of automated process is going to be used to number them.
There is very little regularity to them, even in urban areas. I can't see a way of allocating codes to them that would be intuitive. The alternative is to aggregate them into larger areas, and then you're into snobbery territory.
What you've got there in blue looks like an ED and these do change regularly.0 -
-
-
Have you ever looked at a map of small areas? Here's one:
There is very little regularity to them, even in urban areas. I can't see a way of allocating codes to them that would be intuitive. The alternative is to aggregate them into larger areas, and then you're into snobbery territory.
The taxi map would be a useful example if this was 1973. Practically every taxi I see in Dublin has an in-car satnav or a driver using a phone with google maps.
I agree that small areas area great innovation for statistical analysis. They were never designed for ease of delivery in mind and this whole issue is a bit of a red herring.
If a picture paints a thousand words, a map can sometimes say even more. The example map allows a perfect illustration of the problem of encoding areas into a postcode. If small areas were encoded, then every house in the large small area in the south west of the map would have the same small area identifier in their postcode. Imagine in five years time development has occurred equally in the four corners of the small area. This would result in new small areas being created that divide the existing small area into quarters. Then five years later we find a development has occurred that has effectively extended the town and we need to divide one of the newly created small areas again to take this into account. This may also cross over the newly created boundaries requiring a boundary change to a small area. So a mere six years after launch we will have houses that will have been assigned their third separate postcode (Census 2016 and Census 2021) if we want to encode small areas.
This is inevitable. This is demographics and geography. This is the negative by-product of encoding any hierarchy in the postcode. It is literally impossible to future proof unless you negatively affect the design of small areas themselves. Small areas were created and will be maintained for statistical analysis purposes. The postcode design cannot be a factor in determining how small areas are maintained, that would be the tail wagging the dog. In my opinion a lower cost random postcode that doesn't need to change is the better solution. I'll leave it as a exercise for the reader to ponder the problems associated with sequencing if that was built in as well.
I would agree with antoinolachtnai that any public grouping would require local consent. Where we may disagree is whether the cost and delay to the project would pass a cost benefit analysis test.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement